MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2762234065 · doi:10.1609/aimag.v39i4.2823

Reports of the Workshops of the 32nd AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence

2018· article· en· W2762234065 on OpenAlexaff
Bruno Bouchard, Kévin Bouchard, Noam Brown, Niyati Chhaya, Eitan Farchi, Sébastien Gaboury, Christopher Geib, Amélie Gyrard, Kokil Jaidka, Sarah Keren, Roni Khardon, Parisa Kordjamshidi, David Martínez, Nicholas Mattei, Martin Michalowski, Reuth Mirsky, Joseph Osborn, Cem Şahin, Arash Shaban‐Nejad, Onn Shehory, Amit Sheth, Ilan Shimshoni, Howie Shrobe, Arunesh Sinha, Atanu R. Sinha, Biplav Srivastava, William Streilein, Georgios Theocharous, Kristen Brent Venable, Neal Wagner, Anna Zamansky

Bibliographic record

VenueAI Magazine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBig Data and Business Intelligence
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer sciencePlan (archaeology)Applications of artificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The AAAI‐18 workshop program offered 15 workshops covering a wide range of topics in AI. The workshops were held February 2–3, 2018, at the Hilton New Orleans Riverside in New Orleans, Louisiana. This report contains summaries of the Affective Content Analysis workshop; the Artificial Intelligence Applied to Assistive Technologies and Smart Environments; the AI and Marketing Science workshop; the Artificial Intelligence for Cyber Security workshop; the AI for Imperfect‐Information Games; the Declarative Learning Based Programming workshop; the Engineering Dependable and Secure Machine Learning Systems workshop; the Health Intelligence workshop; the Knowledge Extraction from Games workshop; the Plan, Activity, and Intent Recognition workshop; the Planning and Inference workshop; the Preference Handling workshop; the Reasoning and Learning for Human‐Machine Dialogues workshop; and the the AI Enhanced Internet of Things Data Processing for Intelligent Applications workshop.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.254

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0760.036

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.084
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAI MagazineSame topicBig Data and Business IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207